[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E262CAA9-1B49-4035-9181-28C6FFDBE21F@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2022 14:00:39 +0200
From: Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@...il.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Brian Johannesmeyer <bjohannesmeyer@...il.com>,
Cristiano Giuffrida <c.giuffrida@...nl>,
"Bos, H.J." <h.j.bos@...nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] block: use dedicated list iterator variable
> On 31. Mar 2022, at 13:59, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
>
> On 3/31/22 3:12 AM, Jakob Koschel wrote:
>> To move the list iterator variable into the list_for_each_entry_*()
>> macro in the future it should be avoided to use the list iterator
>> variable after the loop body.
>>
>> To *never* use the list iterator variable after the loop it was
>> concluded to use a separate iterator variable instead of a
>> found boolean [1].
>
> Not a huge fan of doing a helper for this single use, but I guess it
> does make the main function easier to code. So I guess that's fine. But
> can you move the call down where the result is checked?
>
> qe = blk_lookup_qe_pair(head, q);
> if (!qe)
> return;
>
> I prefer no distance between call and check, makes it easier to read. I
> can make the edit locally and note it in the commit message so you don't
> have to re-send it. Let me know, or just resend a v3.
I'm fine with you doing the change locally, thanks!
>
> --
> Jens Axboe
>
Jakob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists